[ga-full] RE: [ga] Registration process suggestion

["!Dr. Joe Baptista" <baptista@pccf.net>]

On Sat, 5 Feb 2000, Joop Teernstra wrote:

> I think the certification issue is a red herring and the electoral process
> suggestions are correct. Short of volunteering myself as a collection point
> for a Voters' roll, I continue to urge the DNSO secretariat to do this
> through its website.

I agree - the certification issue is bogus.  I personally like your
approach of "trusted people" registering the vote.  If it's ready to go -
I'm here.  There are some issue on which we don't agree - but I don't
think their astronomical.

But in respect of the "trusted people" you mentioned in earlier posts, you
may remember I provided a potential list of "trusted people" Harald
approved of - but have yet to see Harald respond.

Why dont' you contact the members on that list and invite them to be our
trusted persons.

> Let's get on with voluntary registration and just challenge multiple
> registrations if there is solid ground to believe that they are multiple.

This I disagree with.  It's time to put an end to the bull, including
claims that people aren't people etc. etc.  Remeber Joop, we are here
representing the interest of the common people on this planet.  That's a
serious trust and as such we can not be subjected to claims of fraud and
other irregularities.  It's time to sort the real from the imaginary on
both sides of the fence.  People must be treated equally and the GA must
not be in a position to entertain claims of fraud or that people are non
people.

> I hope you can also bear to be wrong. I just made the posting to correct
> the "myth of the 286 in the Third World" . I know you may see them

We'll we both agree the whole certification process is a red herring.

regards
Joe